That's certainly _a_ problem. It's by no means the only one. There are also idiots who speed. Apparently the deaths have dropped significantly in the road from Belfast towards Julie's parent's home since the average-speed cameras went in. Doesn't stop her mum complaining though :->
But when 'too fast' is being defined by arbitrary limits that in many (probably not even most, but many) cases make no sense, it creates a tendancy to ignore the limit in all cases in some people.
I drive according to my judgement of safety for the road I'm on, the road to Jennie's work is a 50, I tend to not go above 40 for a lot of it because I don't think it should be a 50 due to the bends.
But on other roads that have 30 limits, I'll do 40ish at times, got pulled over on one of them once (in Devon), police basically wanted to make sure I knew it was a 30 because of the zoning laws, despite being a bypass with no pedestrian access, it went through a residential area so had to be a 30, they said they virtually never ticket anyone on the road, but do keep track of who they've warned.
Implicitly, they agreed the speed limit was daft and I was driving safely--I didn't know it was a 30 limit, and I was driving safely.
Get the speed limits that are too low, of which there are many, sorted, and severely punish those that actually cause accidents through driving too fast.
I think that many people agree that some speed limits don't make sense. But I never see campaigns for the increase of speed limits, only for the removal of methods of telling if someone is breaking the law.
Which is exactly my point. The people who object to speed cameras always campaign against the camera, not the law they're there to enforce, and I wonder why.
It's not something I currently campaign on one way or t'other, given the car's dead and being sold, but I do think "this device shows I break the law, ban the device" is stupid, whereas "this device helps enforce a stupid law, change the law" is supportable in many cases.
Average speed cameras are a MUCH better idea than the ones that just take a photo if you're going over the speed limit at that moment. In Cambridge we have about 5-10 miles of average speed cameras, and guess what? On that bit of road everyone perfectly obeys the speed limit. Everywhere else there is a speed camera you get people slowing down for them then speeding up to compensate.
Apparently the deaths have dropped significantly in the road from Belfast towards Julie's parent's home since the average-speed cameras went in.
This is a very, very common finding when speed cameras (of any sort) are installed, but it's not quite as slam-dunk as it might appear thanks to regression to the mean. Typically, cameras are installed on bits of road where there have been a lot of accidents. (This has in fact been UK policy for years.) Which may be because those bits were particularly dangerous, or may be pure chance. If the accidents fall, it might be because people are driving more safely, or may be simple regression to the mean. Or a bit of both. There's no way of telling from the stats for a single site.
And this argument is made and countered endlessly in the debate about speed cameras, and only rarely with much light shed.
This was a nasty piece of road between a city and a line of commuter towns, which idiots would drive home on at high speed. It was a known black spot for years, with speed cameras on a few spots of it. Putting an average speed camera over the length of it had, apparently, a large impact quite quickly.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-08-17 12:01 pm
no subject
no subject
Are the accidents caused by them speeding, or by them being idiots?
no subject
no subject
But when 'too fast' is being defined by arbitrary limits that in many (probably not even most, but many) cases make no sense, it creates a tendancy to ignore the limit in all cases in some people.
I drive according to my judgement of safety for the road I'm on, the road to Jennie's work is a 50, I tend to not go above 40 for a lot of it because I don't think it should be a 50 due to the bends.
But on other roads that have 30 limits, I'll do 40ish at times, got pulled over on one of them once (in Devon), police basically wanted to make sure I knew it was a 30 because of the zoning laws, despite being a bypass with no pedestrian access, it went through a residential area so had to be a 30, they said they virtually never ticket anyone on the road, but do keep track of who they've warned.
Implicitly, they agreed the speed limit was daft and I was driving safely--I didn't know it was a 30 limit, and I was driving safely.
Get the speed limits that are too low, of which there are many, sorted, and severely punish those that actually cause accidents through driving too fast.
no subject
no subject
It's not something I currently campaign on one way or t'other, given the car's dead and being sold, but I do think "this device shows I break the law, ban the device" is stupid, whereas "this device helps enforce a stupid law, change the law" is supportable in many cases.
no subject
no subject
no subject
This is a very, very common finding when speed cameras (of any sort) are installed, but it's not quite as slam-dunk as it might appear thanks to regression to the mean. Typically, cameras are installed on bits of road where there have been a lot of accidents. (This has in fact been UK policy for years.) Which may be because those bits were particularly dangerous, or may be pure chance. If the accidents fall, it might be because people are driving more safely, or may be simple regression to the mean. Or a bit of both. There's no way of telling from the stats for a single site.
And this argument is made and countered endlessly in the debate about speed cameras, and only rarely with much light shed.
no subject
This was a nasty piece of road between a city and a line of commuter towns, which idiots would drive home on at high speed. It was a known black spot for years, with speed cameras on a few spots of it. Putting an average speed camera over the length of it had, apparently, a large impact quite quickly.